3.3 MODELO DE OPERACIÓN DE LA CONVOCATORIA
3.3.8 CIERRE DE LA CONVOCATORIA
Researchers have recognized the benefits of PBL for decades. What is not clearly established is how PBL can be implemented in college-level technology programs or in university-level engineering programs in order to realize the benefits of PBL. This research study on PBL was conducted at a course level in a 2-hour weekly lab class for 15 weeks. A recommendation for a college-level technology program or a university-level engineering program is to conduct a pilot study on implementing PBL at a program level, where all courses would be taught using PBL. The results of such an exercise would be informative.
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES
Akins, K., Durham, J., Smit, J.A., & VanDenend, J. Project based learning vs. traditional instruction in the fourth grade science curriculum. Ottawa Area Intermediate School District. Retrieved June 14th, 2012, from
http://www.oaisd.org/downloads/instructional_services__action_research/proj ect_based_learning_vs_traditional_instruction_in_4th_gr_sci_20090612_073 522_250.pdf
Bilgin, I., & Karaduman, A. (2005). Isbirlikli ogrenmenin 8. Sinif orgrencilerini fen dersine karsci tutumalarina etkisinin incelenmesi in Kavacik, Yelkin, & Surmeli.
Boud, D. (2010). Assessment 2020. Seven propositions for assessment reform in higher education in Jollands, Jolly, & Molyneaux.
Camps, J. Tool for scheduling and monitoring teamwork in Project-based learning in engineering education. Centre de recherche de Mines Paristech. Retrieved August 17th, 2016 from http://cgs-mines-paristech.fr/tmci/wp-
content/uploads/2015/02/Tool-for-scheduling-and-monitoring-teamwork-in- Project-Based-Learning-in-engineering-education.pdf
Carter, G., Armour, D.G., Lee, L.S., & Sharples, R. (1980). Assessment of undergraduate electrical engineering laboratory studies. IEE Proceedings A, 127(7), 460-474.
Catherine, M., & Barry, J.F. (2008). Learning environment and attitudes associated with an innovative science course designed for prospective elementary teachers in Kavacik, Yelkin, & Surmeli.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.
Doppelt, Y. (2003). Implementation and assessment of project-based learning in a flexible environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, 255-272.
Duch, B.J., Groh, S.E., & Allen, D.E (2001). The power of problem-based learning: a practical how to for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline in Jollands, Jolly, & Molyneaux.
Dunkin, M.J., & Biddle, B.J. (1974). The study of teaching in Garton, Spain, Lamberson, & Spiers.
Garton, B.L., Spain, J.N., Lamberson, W.R & Spiers, D.E. (1999). Learning styles, teaching performance, and student achievement: a relational study. Journal Of Agricultural Education, 40(3), 11-20.
Greenwald, A. G. (1989). Why attitudes are important: Defining attitude and attitude theory 20 years later. In A. R. Pratkanis, S. J. Breckler & A. G. Greenwald (Eds.), Attitude structure and function (pp. 429-440). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gultekin, Z. (2009). Fen egitiminde proje tabanli ogrenme uygulamalarinin ogrencilerin bilimin dogasiyla ilgili goruslerine, bilimsel surec becesrilerine ve tutumlarina etkisi in Karacalli and Korur.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K.A, (1998). Cooperative Learning Returns To College: What Evidence Is There That It Works? Change, July/August 1998, 27-35.
103
Jollands, M., Jolly, L., & Molyneaux, T. (2012). Project-based learning as a contributing factor to graduates‘ work readiness. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(2), 143-154.
Karacalli, S., & Korur, F. (2014). The Effects of Project-Based Learning on Students’ Academic Achievement, Attitude, Retention of Knowledge: The Subject of “Electricity in Our Lives”. School Science & Mathematics, 114 (5), 224-235. Kavacik, L., Yelken, T.Y., & Surmeli, H. (2015). Innovation Practices in Elementary
School Science and Technology Course and their Effects on Students. Education & Science, 40(180), 247-263.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). In Armstrong, S. J. & Fukami, C. (Ed.), Experiential learning theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to management learning, education and development (pp. 50). London: Sage Publications Handbook of Management Learning, Education and Development.
Kolb, A.Y., & Kolb, D.A (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212.
Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Regis University Faculty.. Retrieved December 30th, 2012 from
http://academic.regis.edu/ed205/Kolb.pdf
Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory in social sciences. New York: Harper & Row.
Ma, J., & Nickerson, J.V. (2006). Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories : A comparative literature review. ACM Computing Survey, 38(8), 1-24.
Mattern, N., & Schau, C. (2001). Gender differences in science attitude-achievement relationships over time among White middle-school students (English). Journal Of Research In Science Teaching, 39(4), 324-340.
Milentijevic, I., Ciric, V., & Vokinovic, O. (2008). Version control in project-based learning in Camps.
Miller, J.B. (2001). The quest for the constructivist statistics classroom: Viewing practice through constructivist theory in Miller.
Miller, J.B. (2002). Examing the interplay between constructivism and different learning styles. The Sixth International Conference on Teaching Statistics. Mills, J.E., & Treagust, D.F. (2003). Engineering education – is problem-based or
project-based the answer in Jollands, Jolly, & Molyneaux.
Murphy, C. (2004). Students as catalysts in the classroom: The impact of co-teaching between science student teachers and primary classroom teachers on children’s enjoyment and learning of science in Karacalli & Korur.
Nedic, Z., Nafalski, A., & Machotka, J. (2010). Motivational project-based laboratory for a common first year electrical engineering course. European Journal Of Engineering Education, 35(4), 379-392.
Noordin, M. K., Nasir, A. N., Ali, D. F., & Nordin, M.S.(2011). Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Project-Based Learning (PjBL) in engineering education: a comparison. Proceedings of the IETEC’11 Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia,
Ocak, A. M., & C. Uluyol. (2010). Investigation of college students’ intrinsic motivation in project based learning. International Journal of Human Sciences, 7(1), 1152-1167.
105
Olsen, N. (2013). Facilitating Problem-based learning in teams with Scrum. International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. 856- 861.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications in Karacalli and Korur.
Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. New York: W. W. Norton and Company. Pimental, J.R. (1999). Design of net-learning systems based on experiential learning.
Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3(2), 64-90.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). Motivation and classroom learning. Handbook of Psychology: Educational Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Salan, U., Birbir, Y., & Birbir, M. (1999). Kucuk gruplarla fen egitiminin ogrenci basarisi iizerine etkisi in Kavacik, Yelkin, & Surmeli.
Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C.H. (2004). Foundations of Problem-based learning in Olsen.
Seloni, S (2005). Fen bilgisi ogretiminde olusan kavram yanilgilarinin proje tabanli ogrenme ile giderilmesi in Karacalli & Korur.
Sertturk, M. (2008). Fen ogretiminde proje tabanli ogrenme yaklasiminin ilkogretim in Karacalli & Korur.
Singer, J., Marx, R. Krajcik, J., & Clay-Chambers, J. (2000). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform in Karacalli & Korur.
Toprak, E. (2006). Proje tabanli ogrenme metodunun ilkogretim 5. Sinif ogrencilerinin fen ve teknoloji dersindeki akademik basarisina etkisi in Karacalli and Korur.
Tsingos, C., Bosnic-Anticevich, S., & Smith, L. (2015). Learning styles and approaches: Can reflective strategies encourage deep learning? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and LearningJournal Of Agricultural Education, 7, 492- 504.
Tulbure, C. (2012). Investigating the relationships between teaching strategies and learning styles in higher education. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(1), 65-74. Vanasupa, L., Chen, K.C., Stolk, J., Savage, R.N., Harding, T.S., London, B., &
Hughes, W.L. (2007). Converting Traditional Materials Lab to Project-based Learning Experiences: Aiding Students’ Development of Higher-order Cognitive Skills. DigitalCommons @ CalPoly. Retrieved June 14th, 2012, from
http://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/mate_fac/2/
Vaughn, L., & Baker, R. (2001). Teaching in the medical setting: balancing teaching styles, learning styles, and teaching methods in Tulbure.
Waks, S. S., & Sabag, N. N. (2004). Technology project learning versus lab experimentation. Journal Of Science Education And Technology, 13(3), 333- 342.
Witkin, H.A. (1973). The role of cognitive-style in academic performance and in teacher-student relations in Garton, Lamberson, Spain, & Spiers.
Woods, D.R. (1994). Problem-based learning: How to gain the most from PBL in Jollands, Jolly, & Molyneaux.
Wyrick, D. A, & Hilsen, L. (2002). Using Kolb’s cycle to round out learning. Procedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Conference & Exposition.
107
Zapater, M., Malagon, P., de Goyeneche, J.M., & Moya, J.M. (2013). Project-based learning and agile methodologies in electronic courses: effect of student population and open issues. Electronics, 17(2), 82-88
Title of the Research
A comparison of project-based learning versus prescriptive learning for laboratory activities in Industrial Electronics.
Researcher(s) Principal Investigator
Department E-Mail Office tel. Time of
availability Nicholas Rudi Industrial Electronics rudin @vaniercollege.qc.ca 514-744-7500 x7365 Mon-Fri: 9am – 5pm
Description of the Research
This research study will be conducted during the Winter 2016 semester in a lab group’s 2-hour weekly laboratory class consisting of a period of 15 weeks. During the first 7 weeks of the semester, all the participants will use prescriptive learning (learning by using a step-by-step procedure) in the laboratory class. For the remaining 8 weeks of the semester, some participants will continue to use prescriptive learning while other participants will use a new teaching method called PBL (project-based learning - learning by building real-world projects). Participants will be asked to complete an in-class questionnaire at the midterm point of the semester and an in-class questionnaire at the end of the semester. This research study will need to have access to your grades with the understanding that your grades will be combined into a group average, with no identifying information. Some participants might be asked to participate in an interview session and a separate consent form will be obtained at that time. The data for this research study will be destroyed once the research is complete.
Potential Harms
Potential Benefits
Your participation will contribute to the on-going process of improving teaching methods in Industrial Electronics.
Confidentiality
Confidentiality will be respected. No identifying information will be included on those questionnaires; you will be given a code ID to use, and the list of IDs will be help by an outsider to the department, and will be destroyed once the data collection is complete. Group grade averages will be calculated by an outsider to the department, so that the researcher will not know who is participating in the study and who is not. No information that discloses your identity will be released or published at any time.
Participation
Your participation or lack of participation in this research study will NOT affect your grades in any way. The researcher will NOT know who is participating or not participating in this research study until the end of the semester after all the grades have been submitted. Your participation is entirely voluntary and you may choose to withdraw at anytime. Whether you choose to participate or not participate in this research study, you will continue to have access to quality education.
Statement of Consent
I certify that I have read the above information, understand the risks, benefits, responsibilities and conditions of participation as outlined in this document, and freely consent to participate in this research study.
Name: Signature: Date:
NB. This template was based on a sample consent form template developed by the National Council on Ethics in Human Research
FACULTY : Careers and Technical Programs
PROGRAM : 243.C0 – Industrial Electronics Technology
DEPARTMENT : Industrial Electronics
COURSE TITLE : ANALOG CIRCUITS
COURSE NO : 243-233-VA
SECTION NO(S): 00001, 00002, 00003
PONDERATION : 2-2-1
lecture - labwork – homework (15 weeks)
NUMBER OF CREDITS : 1.67 credits
PREREQUISITE(S) : Electrical Technology (243-143-VA)
SEMESTER :
2nd Semester (Fall Entry) and 3rd Semester (Winter
Entry)
SEMESTER /YEAR Winter 2016
TEACHER : Nicholas Rudi Office K-310
Tel. 514-744-7500 x7365 e-mail [email protected] AVAILABILITY: Office hours will be posted on the office
door
By prior arrangement with the teacher
Course Description
This course will extend the students’ solid understanding of the fundamental
concepts in electrical technology using semiconductor devices and linear integrated circuits. Students will prepare, assemble, troubleshoot, measure, and analyze typical circuits used in industrial application. The student will also be introduced to circuit simulation.
Statement of Competence
Statement of Competency Course Objectives 1. To verify extra-low voltage signals and
Prepare to take measurements or perform data acquisition.
Take the measurements or perform data acquisition.
Analyze the data. Record the information.
Accurate interpretation of information provided, accurate identification of the required variable, proper determination of and performance of the required numeric calculation in an industrial electronics problem.
Accurate interpretation of units of measurement and performance of any required unit conversions and clear specification of the results in the appropriate units.
Proper graphic representation of vectors, proper use of methods for adding and resolving vectors including graphical and algebraic manipulations of vectors in conformity with rules and accurate calculations of vectors
Proper and appropriate representation of complex numbers (polar, rectangular and graphic)
Proper use of methods and accurate calculations for performing basic mathematical operations (addition, subtraction, multiplication and division) of complex numbers
Proper assembly of a simple electronics circuit from its schematic representation, including the adjustment and proper connection of the power source to the circuit.
Determine the characteristics of the circuit devices.
2. To adjust the devices in the measuring chain (043B)
Inspect the measuring chain Select, verify the function of, adjust and properly connect the appropriate instruments (multi-meter, oscilloscope, frequency counter etc.) for the circuits under test.
Take accurate measurements and perform the electrical circuit calculations correctly to verify results.
Correctly identify the circuit topology and circuit elements and correct production of a schematic diagram of an assembled circuit.
Course Content and Tentative Dates (
see *Note1)
Week Week of Lectures Activities
1
Jan 18 -
Jan 22 Introduction to Analog circuits Activity #1 – Introduction to Analog circuits
2
Jan 25-
Jan 29 Basic concepts of analog circuits, signals and measurements Activity #2 – Using Test and Measurement Equipment
3 Feb 1- Feb 5 Diodes Activity #3 – Introduction to Diodes 4 Feb 8- Feb 12 Diode Applications Activity #4 – Diode Circuit Applications
5
Feb 15-
Feb 19 Bipolar Junction Transistors (BJT’s)
Activity #5 – Introduction to BJTs Transistors Activity #5 - Lab Report #1
6 Feb 22- Feb 26 Midterm Test Activity #6 – Review of Test and Measurement Equipment
7
Feb 29-
Mar 4 BJT Applications Activity #7 - Lab Test
8
Mar 7-
Mar 11 Transistor Amplifiers Activity #8 – BJT CE Amplifier Midterm Break
9
*Note2
Mar 21-
Mar 25 Analog Simulation Activity #9 – Analog Simulation 10
*Note2
Mar 28-
Apr 1 Power Amplifiers Activity #10 – Power Amplifiers
11 Apr 4-
Apr 8 Analog Switching Circuits
Activity #11 – Analog Switching Circuits
12
Apr 11-
Apr 15 Operational Amplifiers Activity #12 – Operational Op-amps Activity #12 - Lab Report #2
13 Apr 18- Apr 22 Voltage Regulator Activity #13 – Voltage Regulator 14 Apr 25- Apr 29 Analog Filters Analog #14 - Analog Filters
15 May 2- May 6 Review Activity #15 – Using NI LabView
Course Material Required
Approximate cost ( Lab/Text Manual
Supplementary lecture and lab notes will be supplied online via
LEA. - -
Logbook $ 3.00
Hardware Tools (available from ABRA Electronics)
Qty Description Part Number
1 Educational PC Oscilloscope VEL-EDU09 $ 60.00
ABRA Breadboard-3260 Tie Points, Code: ABRA-48, ABRA
Electronics (unless you already have one) $ 28.00
Standard 8GB USB Flash Drive (unless you already have one) $ 20.00 Total (approximately) $ 111.00
Bibliography
Electronic Devices, 9th edition, Prentice-Hall, Thomas L. Floyd, ISBN: 9780132549868 (available at the Vanier College library circulation desk)
Course Structure
THEORY: 2 hour(s) / week Lecture and discussion, with student participation.
LABORATORY: 2 hour(s) / week Demonstration, lab activities and work performed by the student. Detailed report written by the student.
HOMEWORK: 1 hour(s) / week The student will be expected to devote approximately the following hours per week to homework.
THEORY: Consistent attendance is strongly recommended. Students are responsible for obtaining all material covered during their absence
LABORATORY: Failure, to complete all labs assigned, without just cause, may result in a failure of the lab session and any assigned work derived from the session.
TESTS/QUIZZES: Absence will result in failure of a missed test or quiz. Students with a just cause for absence from a test (Midterm, Final, or Lab Test) are asked to seek alternative arrangements with the instructor 1 week prior to the test.
Evaluation of the student will be based on his/her performance in class test(s), quizzes, homework, lab work, and lab reports.
The final mark will be weighted: 50% theory 20% 15% 15% Homework/Quizzes Midterm Test Final Test 50% lab work 15% 25% 10% Lab Test Lab Report Lab Completion Total 100%
Ice breaker introduction or chat
Hi my name is Nicholas Rudi from Vanier College. I am conducting a survey of Vanier College students in the Analog Circuits course to determine the effectiveness of the different methods used for the laboratory activities. The results of this survey might be used to do further research on improving 1st year courses in the Industrial
Electronics department. I would like to ask for your consent to ask you a few questions that will not take longer than 30 minutes.
Get the interviewee interested in the topic
Why did you select the Industrial Electronics program at Vanier College?
1. What is your name?
Student’s Attitudes towards electronics
2. Do you like learning about electronics?
3. What method do you prefer using when you are studying for electronics?
Comparing Lab Activities
4. Did you notice a difference between the lab activities before the midterm break and after the midterm?
5. Which lab activities did you prefer, before or after the break? Explain why?
6. Which lab activities did you consider not useful? Explain why? 7. Which lab activities motivated you to look at electronics you use
in everyday life? Give an example.
8. Do you see the field of electronics differently now that you have completed the course? Explain.
Problem-Based Learning Lab Activities after the midterm break:
9. Were the lab activities easy to follow? Why or why not? 10. Were the lab activities interesting and fun? Why or why not? 11. Did the use of lab activities after the midterm break increase
your level of knowledge as compared to the traditional laboratory activity approach? In what way?
12. What do you perceive as the main benefit of the lab activities after the midterm break?
13. What do you perceive as the main problem of the lab activities after the midterm break?
14. What have you learned in doing the lab activities besides content?
Student’s Learning Style
15. How do you like learning?
16. What is the most important aspect about learning?
17. When you encounter a problem in the lab class for the first time, you like to…..
18. Your preferred approach to learning is to…… 19. You are happy when a course……..
Ending the interview
I would like thank-you for taking the time to complete this interview. If you would like a copy of the results of this research study, please feel free to contact me at Vanier College.
Academic Efficacy (Motivation) - Student’s confidence in their cognitive skills to perform a task
Behaviourial Construct (Attitude) - Behaviours associated with the subject matter
Cognitive Construct (Attitude) - Beliefs associated to the subject matter Cognitive Engagement
(Motivation)
- Quality of a student’s engagement to a task
Emotional Construct (Attitude) - Feelings associated to the subject matter Interest Construct (Motivation) - Value and importance a student places on a
Lab Section: Wed-8am Wed-10am Thurs-11am
Attitudes towards Electronics (multiple choice - please place only one check mark)
1 I have always been fascinated with electronics.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
2 A significant challenge when learning electronics is being able to
memorize all the information.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
3 I think about the electronics that I use in everyday life.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
4 Even after I learn about a topic in electronics and feel that I understand it, I have difficulty solving problems on the same topic.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
The purpose of this questionnaire is to evaluate the teaching method of the lab activities after the midterm break in the Analog Circuits course. This is an anonymous questionnaire and the questions asked include your interests, your motivations, your perceptions, and how you like to learn the subject of electronics. The questionnaire should not take longer than 10 minutes to complete. I would like to thank-you in advance for your participation.
Student CodeID (sent to you by MIO):
5 Knowledge in electronics consists of many
disconnected topics.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
6 I am not satisfied until I understand why something works the way it does.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
7 I study electronics to learn knowledge that will be useful to daily life.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
8 I think anyone can learn electronics.
Strongly
Agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly
Disagree
9 To understand